Amazon sorta capitulates, will let publishers decide text-to-speech availability
By Ross Miller 
posted Feb 27th 2009 7:48PM
posted Feb 27th 2009 7:48PM
Statement from Amazon.com Regarding Kindle 2's Experimental Text-to-Speech Feature
SEATTLE, Feb 27, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Kindle 2's experimental text-to-speech feature is legal: no copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given. Furthermore, we ourselves are a major participant in the professionally narrated audiobooks business through our subsidiaries Audible and Brilliance. We believe text-to-speech will introduce new customers to the convenience of listening to books and thereby grow the professionally narrated audiobooks business.
Nevertheless, we strongly believe many rightsholders will be more comfortable with the text-to-speech feature if they are in the driver's seat.
Therefore, we are modifying our systems so that rightsholders can decide on a title by title basis whether they want text-to-speech enabled or disabled for any particular title. We have already begun to work on the technical changes required to give authors and publishers that choice. With this new level of control, publishers and authors will be able to decide for themselves whether it is in their commercial interests to leave text-to-speech enabled. We believe many will decide that it is.
Customers tell us that with Kindle, they read more, and buy more books. We are passionate about bringing the benefits of modern technology to long-form reading.
I thought audiobooks where read by a real person? So why does some (most likely) crappy TTS software really pose as a threat, if i was blind i would prefer to hear a real person over a robot voice.
Someday, this kind of software will REALLY pose a threat to audio books read by a real person, the authors guild knows it and needs to set some presidence now. Although I do agree in it's current form it might be easy to say "what's the big deal?" but in an age when all printed media is struggling, would you want to be on the wrong end of a technological revolution if it threatend your paycheck?
NOOOOOOOOOOO!
My sentiments exactly. I thought that this would be a case where a big company would fight (a legal battle, if necessary) for the benefit of it's customers. Amazon has the resources, and could have set a good precedent. Instead, Amazon totally chickened out, and agreed to screw their customers instead.
I foresee a lot of confused customers wondering why only some books are read by the robot.
Capitalism is failing us. It's all about bringing the best product to the customer and instead it's been turned around to favor the companies.
It's not capitalism, in fact, that is THE ONLY thing that's working here. It's the stupid copyright laws that the companies lobbied into politicians' a$$es.
You need to investigate what capitalism is.
Capitalism is when companies compete to produce the best products and thus inadvertently improve our lives the most while they try to get rich selling products.
It requires competition. Whenever companies work in fashions such as this to reduce competition it thwarts capitalism and hurts the consumer.
That is what is happening here. Capitalism is failing to work.
Actually it is capitalism at work. Amazon may eventually decide to stop carrying some publishers' ebooks because consumers stopped buying Kindles because not all the books they want could have text-to-speech. (Unlikely) Or maybe because publishers forced Amazon to charge a different rate for text-to-speech enabled books and consumers said you-know-what. (Unlikely) What is more likely is that Amazon won't carry publishers unless TTS is enabled because people stop buying THOSE ebooks. Then most publishers will [pun warning] capitulate. The Market works, but not as fast as consumers would really prefer, so this is actually why we do need some government oversight to force greedy people and the corporations they run to actually act in the Public interest, especially in the interest of a minority such as blind users or people in wheelchairs who need ramps cut into curbs and bathrooms with bigger doorways. Perhaps the Internet and even this article are helping to speed up the Market response. Now if Amazon posted a list of publishers *and authors* who don't allow TTS for their ebooks (which will happen) it would be even faster. The thing that will be hard to track is *sales lost due to no TTS*. Amazon could track this by not letting people know until check-out then tracking the Remove-from-Cart bailouts. Note that some music artists don't allow Apple iTunes Store to sell single tracks because the artists don't think their work should be played except as a whole. Note that consumers are finally winning the DRM thing, not because of laws, but because we are voting with our purchases. But look how long it's taking. However, artists and authors who have the luxury of not needing our money will always be free (and freedom is the real issue here) to not release their works in certain media modes.
Well, that's it. I'll never pay for another audio book again. It's a small gesture--but Amazon and the Author's Guild will never make another penny off of me from audio book sales.
don't forget that the recession is because you and i are not buying enough. so its up to use to keep these companies afloat. and when they are on the verge of failing they ask the govt for our money anyway... or at least the big ones do.
Capitalism isn't about the "best." It's about what sells the most. Just in case you weren't paying attention your entire life, garbage sells when packaged nicely.
You can call it capitalism if you'd like, but it isn't. This is a conscious effort not to compete with audio books. That's not capitalism.
The market works?
Which one do you mean?
The housing market?
The securities markets?
How about media (see article "Cable Companies want a piece of the internet video pie.")?
It's stunning how badly markets are working nowadays. So many of them. Companies have just refined fooling/jerking around the customer to an art form.
At this moment thousands of people start waiting for someone to "jailbreak" the kindle..... why did amazon have to do that to us...
May the hacker fight back! Q('_' Q)
There might have been some behind the door threats to pull out coming from the publishers.
@plothole:
+1
That would be one way to pressure Amazon. What good is the Kindle if suddenly there aren't big-name books available for it?
I'm not happy with Amazon's decision, but they probably had no other choice.
yeah, that was my first thought when i read this, someone's just going to hack it
This is a downright disappointment, and will just lead to another device that offers TTS WITHOUT letting the publisher decide.
Nerfing a feature to prop up an outdated business model is bullshit.
Let me guess, the ability to process text through TTS won't be on/off, it'll be a "premium" price? What is this, 2001?
You know what, if I liked it that much, I'd buy the audiobook, but now there's no way I would if they're going to get so pissy about it.
This is just dumb. It will only hurt revenues for publishers and ultimately writers because people will start to refuse to buy e-books without TTS enabled.
No one will be willing to pay for it either because it was advertised as a free feature on the Kindle 2. It's like giving someone a tasty cookie, then saying.. nope you can't have it anymore.
Way to stand up for your customers, Amazon.
Disgusting. Reminds me of DRM vs People, same shit here. Hide behind "protect author's rights" argument and milk more money from your customers.
I smell class action lawsuit. I'll take fifty bucks to compensate for the feature I was promised for my kindle 2.
wtf amazon. I better be able to return it now.
This was the one feature that had me ready to pull the trigger on the Kindle2 - I'm glad I read this before I ordered it because now I'm not going to - nice job Amazon! Way to show some backbone!
What a fucking ugly thing that plate is... Incredible. I would not buy that brick for 5 dollar even.
I really hate Amazon at times.
Publishers that don't allow for this feature by default should be sued for discrimination of access against disabled people (eg. blind people).
And here we go :D American law system at its best...
i agree: that's when the legal system does work, and that's why the republicans are trying to brainwash us into hating "frivolous litigation." meanwhile, we can't count on congress or the white house to even poison out of toothpaste, dog food, or even baby food. you want something done right, sue the bastards. money talks.
What a joke
If I decide to read it in morse code, do I have the rights to that? What if I read it through Google Translate or shorthand? Is Braille extra?
lol
They should either grandfather this in, or provide a refund of sorts for those who already purchased the kindle 2. It is taking away a feature that was enabled in the original specs.
Does Amazon fear the Author's Guild or a class action lawsuit more?
No, they shouldn't. If you already bought a kindle, you should send that POS back to Amazon and boycot Amazon until they remove the TTS restriction. It's time someone taught Amazon that the consumers are the boss, not the sellers, because without customers, all they've got is a big pile of worthless junk. All a class action suit does is reward the lawyers, not selling any kindles punishes Amazon directly for their short-sightedness. Also don't buy any books from them (regular or E), and see where the publishers end up. If their sales drop a significant amount, they'll be begging for the feature to be added.
"Nevertheless, we strongly believe many rightsholders will be more comfortable with the text-to-speech feature if they are in the driver's seat."
I'm glad they're so concerned with the comfort of rightsholders. Too bad that comfort trumps, by their own account, the LEGAL RIGHT customers have to that feature:
"Kindle 2's experimental text-to-speech feature is legal"
I know, nixing their own application is not the same as preventing users from installing their own -- but it's certainly another great reason not to buy a closed system.
Amazon is clearly modeling this device on the iPod, but it's as if they've made an iPod that only plays music from the Apple Store -- and now they've given artists the right to block the use of the equalizer.
Okay all you authors...you've made up my mind, I won't be buying any of your books in which I can use TSS. See greed does nothing more then screw you in the end!
Lets try that again...how about "can't use TSS..."
They don't say that they will ALLOW CHARGING for the TTS feature being enabled. Basically publishers will have the right to say, yay or nay, but this doesn't concede that Amazon will allow that right to be charged for. That's how I interpreted it.
I bought the Kindle 2 for my daughter who has a learning disability, the specific function of text to speech was the sole reason for buying this. Giving her the ability to read AND hear the words at the same time gives her access to the written word in a way not possible with EITHER printed or audio books alone. This is very saddening.
This really kinda sucks. I have dyslexia and the tts is the main reason I laid out $359 for this thing. I was very excited about not having to take the normal 6 months to read a book. Amazon is not looking after its customers on this one, which seems very strange after watching Bezos on Charlie Rose last night pontificating on how the customer is king.
This news did not come as any surpise to me. Amazon is in no position to fight this battle. They need content for the Kindle and they want that content to expand as quickly as possible. Get into a pissing contest with the authors and books get held up.
I want content for my Kindle and if that means losing the TTS option once in a while, so be it. Authors should get paid and should have rights to the audio presentation of their work.
I don't expect a free lunch.
free lunch? what cloud are you on? TTS is a feature that people paid for. if it was free it would be an "addon" to kindle1.
A lunch which you pay for and then is taken away doesn't really class as 'free'.
I think Amazon made the right call here.
The alternative was likely raising the price of each book. The TTS feature is gimmick, as most of us I imagine reading books, and if we do like audiobooks would want them professionally read by humans.
The result of this is that book costs stay low and there is greater availability for each book.
Also, they avoid the chance of a costly lawsuit that could hurt book prices.
I think this is a huge win and a great way to deal with the stupid litigation by the Authors Guild... completely deny them what they were arguing about.
Win win.
"I don't think I would use TTS, therefore nobody else could ever have any reason to either."
Tightened that up for ya.
UMm.. So if I should invent a robot that could pick up a book and read to me. What happened then? Does the author have the right to stop my robot from doing so? Do they have the right to stop me from producing my invention because it might enable infringement on their property?
That's all fine an dandy but I want my compensation because I paid for a feature that most likely will not work now with most books. Amazon should have done their homework since they are a big multi-billion dollar company. Without the TTS, I say the Kindle is worth about $250 so they better be ready to credit me.
I'm pretty sure that them removing a feature does not mean that you get to choose the price for the product. You certainly have the right to complain, and you most likely have some legal standing for getting your money back (and I'm guessing Amazon will allow you to return it), but it does not give you the right, legally or otherwise, to determine a discount of your own choosing.
This is actually a pretty slick move by Amazon. The Author's Guild decided to be a--hats and Amazon called their bluff. Amazon isn't giving them more money - they're handing them the rope the ADA will hang them with. Once the mythical AI supercomputer is built that can perfectly read and understand literature (and fit in a 1/3" device) - they can exercise their power. Until then... the first idiot publisher with the balls to flag their content hates disabled people.